In Unbelievable Errors, Bart Streumer offers resourceful arguments against each of non-reductive realism, reductive realism, and non-cognitivism, in order to motivate his version of the normative error theory, according to which normative predicates ascribe properties that do not exist. In this contribution, I argue that none of the steps of this master argument succeed, and that Streumer’s arguments leave puzzles about what it means to ascribe a property at all.
Purchase
Buy instant access (PDF download and unlimited online access):
Institutional Login
Log in with Open Athens, Shibboleth, or your institutional credentials
Personal login
Log in with your brill.com account
Blackburn S. 1973. “Moral Realism.” In Casey J. (ed.), Morality and Moral Reasoning, 101–124. London: Methuen.
Brown C. 2011. “A New and Improved Supervenience Argument for Ethical Descriptivism,” Oxford Studies in Metaethics 6: 205–218.
Dreier J. 1996. “Expressivist Embeddings and Minimalist Truth,” Philosophical Studies 83: 29–51.
Dunaway B. 2015. “Supervenience Arguments and Normative Nonnaturalism,” Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 91: 627–655.
Finlay S. 2008. “The Error in the Error Theory,” Australasian Journal of Philosophy 86: 347–369.
Gibbard A. 2003. Thinking How to Live. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Horgan T. and Timmons M. 1991. “New Wave Moral Realism Meets Moral Twin Earth,” Journal of Philosophical Research 16: 447–465.
Horgan T. and Timmons M. 1992. “Troubles for New Wave Moral Semantics: The Open Question Argument Revived,” Philosophical Papers 21/3: 153–175.
Horgan T. and Timmons M. 1996a. “Troubles for Michael Smith’s Metaethical Rationalism,” Philosophical Papers 25/3: 203–231.
Horgan T. and Timmons M. 1996b. “From Moral Realism to Moral Relativism in One Easy Step,” Critica: Revista Hisponoamericana de Filosofía 28: 3–39.
Horgan T. and Timmons M. 2000. “Copping Out on Moral Twin Earth,” Synthese 124: 139–152.
Horgan T. and Timmons M. 2009. “Analytical Functionalism Meets Moral Twin Earth.” In Ravenscroft I. (ed.), Mind, Ethics, and Conditionals: Themes from the Philosophy of Frank Jackson. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Horgan T. and Timmons M. 2004. “Cognitivist Expressivism.” In Horgan T. and Timmons M. (eds.), Metaethics After Moore, 255–298. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Jackson F. 1998. From Metaphysics to Ethics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Joyce R. 2001. The Myth of Morality. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Kim J. 1984. “Concepts of Supervenience,” Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 45: 153–176.
Oddie G. 2005. Value, Reality, and Desire. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Olson J. 2014. Moral Error Theory: History, Critique, Defense. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Perl C. and Schroeder M. Forthcoming. “Attributing Error Without Taking a Stand,” Philosophical Studies.
Schmitt J. and Schroeder M. 2011. “Supervenience Arguments Under Relaxed Assumptions,” Philosophical Studies 155: 133–160.
Schroeder M. 2005. “Realism and Reduction: The Quest for Robustness,” Philosophers’ Imprint 5/1.
Schroeder M. 2007. Slaves of the Passions. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Schroeder M. 2008. Being For: Evaluating the Semantic Program of Expressivism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Schroeder M. 2008. “How Expressivists Can and Should Solve Their Problem with Negation,” Noûs 42/4: 573–599.
Schroeder M. 2013. “Two Roles for Propositions: Cause for Divorce?” Noûs 47/3: 409–430.
Schroeder M. 2014. “The Price of Supervenience.” In Schroeder M. , Explaining the Reasons We Share, volume 1 of Explanation and Expression in Ethics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Schroeder M. 2015. Expressing Our Attitudes, volume 2 of Explanation and Expression in Ethics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Schroeder M. ms. “A Common Subject for Ethics.”
Shope R. 1978. “The Conditional Fallacy in Contemporary Philosophy,” The Journal of Philosophy 75/8: 379–413.
Streumer B. 2017. Unbelievable Errors. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
All Time | Past 365 days | Past 30 Days | |
---|---|---|---|
Abstract Views | 683 | 100 | 20 |
Full Text Views | 169 | 7 | 1 |
PDF Views & Downloads | 137 | 16 | 1 |
In Unbelievable Errors, Bart Streumer offers resourceful arguments against each of non-reductive realism, reductive realism, and non-cognitivism, in order to motivate his version of the normative error theory, according to which normative predicates ascribe properties that do not exist. In this contribution, I argue that none of the steps of this master argument succeed, and that Streumer’s arguments leave puzzles about what it means to ascribe a property at all.
All Time | Past 365 days | Past 30 Days | |
---|---|---|---|
Abstract Views | 683 | 100 | 20 |
Full Text Views | 169 | 7 | 1 |
PDF Views & Downloads | 137 | 16 | 1 |